Search

The annual Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Halifax, Nova Scotia, 20&ndash, 22 September 2018. Experts in radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, and pathology who are involved in the management of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses multiple topics in the management of pancreatic cancer, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, hepatocellular cancer, and rectal and colon cancer, including &#9632, surgical management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, &#9632, adjuvant and metastatic systemic therapy options in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, &#9632, the role of radiotherapy in the management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, &#9632, systemic therapy in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, &#9632, updates in systemic therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, &#9632, optimum duration of adjuvant systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and &#9632, sequence of therapy in oligometastatic colorectal cancer.

The annual Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2017 was held in St. John&rsquo, s, Newfoundland and Labrador, 28&ndash, 30 September. Experts in radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, and cancer genetics who are involved in the management of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses multiple topics in the management of gastric, rectal, and colon cancer, including &#9632, identification and management of hereditary gastric and colorectal cancer (crc), &#9632, palliative systemic therapy for metastatic gastric cancer, optimum duration of preoperative radiation in rectal cancer&mdash, that is, short- compared with long-course radiation, management options for peritoneal carcinomatosis in crc, implications of tumour location for treatment and prognosis in crc, and &#9632, new molecular markers in crc.

Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) such as trastuzumab and bevacizumab have become important yet expensive components of systemic cancer therapy across a variety of disease sites. We assessed the potential cost implications of adopting trastuzumab and bevacizumab therapy in the context of their potential utilization in breast, lung, and colorectal cancers. We first estimated MAb costs per patient and treatment indication and then included the MAb acquisition cost and the costs of medical resource utilizations required for therapy delivery. Drug costs were based on 2005 average Canadian wholesale prices, assuming full drug delivery and uncomplicated cycles. A direct-payer perspective was undertaken, and results are reported in Canadian dollars. Potential lifetime costs were then derived according to constructed schema, which account for absolute numbers of target patients and systemic therapy utilization. We subsequently estimated costs of MAb therapy relative to total costs of conventional management without MAb therapy. Trastuzumab costs $49,915 and $28,350 per patient treated in the adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer settings, respectively, bevacizumab costs $48,490 and $39,614 per patient treated in the metastatic lung and colorectal cancer settings, respectively. Potential lifetime absolute costs to Canada&rsquo, s health care system were approximately $127 million and $299 million for trastuzumab and bevacizumab respectively, corresponding to an average increase in health care expenditure of approximately 19% for breast cancer and 21% for lung and colorectal cancer over conventional management without MAbs. Novel Mab-based therapies such as trastuzumab and bevacizumab will likely add a significant cost burden to Canada&rsquo, s publicly funded health care system.

6581 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy for SIII colon cancer is an accepted standard of care. Oral Capecitabine (CAP) has been shown to be at least equivalent and possibly superior to 5FU/LV (Mayo regimen) with regards to a superior relapse free survival. This new option is associated with a higher drug cost but improved toxicity profile and appears to be cost-effective (CE). An economic analysis was undertaken to examine the potential budget impact for CAP in Canada and its provinces for 2007 onwards. Methods: A previously developed cost-effectiveness model was adapted to a prevalence perspective to project the net budgetary impact of CAP over a 5 year horizon. The projected population and incidence of colon cancer for each Canadian province from 2007–2016 was obtained and the proportion of patients with SIII colon cancer suitable for adjuvant chemotherapy was estimated from the literature. The average budget impact in the first 5 years (start up phase) and subsequent years (steady state) was assessed in Canadian $. Results: The projected average annual impact for Canada is 13.9 million (M) during the start up phase and $11.8 M during the steady state phase (NL $210K, PEI $63K, NS $424K, NB $282K, QC $2.92M, ON $4.66M, MB $464K, SK $336K, AB $993K and BC 1.45M). Budget impact is greater during the initial start-up phase (2007–11), as the steady state impact (2012–16) includes relapses avoided over a 5-year period. Sensitivity analyses for key parameters will be provided. Conclusions: The annual budget impact of CAP decreases over time and reaches a steady state after 5 years when the full impact of decreased recurrences is captured. As CAP appears to be CE, budget impact analysis has the potential to assist in the planning of healthcare funding resources regarding this treatment option. [Table: see text]

6590 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) has become a new standard of care. However, referral and utilization patterns for adjuvant chemotherapy outside of clinical trials remain unknown. Methods: All patients with NSCLC who underwent curative-intent surgery in Nova Scotia, Canada, in year 2005 were identified. Data were abstracted from the provincial cancer registry, and the patients’ charts at the two provincial cancer centers. A retrospective exploratory analysis was conducted utilizing logistic regression models to determine the statistically significant variables associated with referral to medical oncology and/or utilization of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: 108 patients who underwent curative-intent surgery (67% lobectomy, 15% pneumonectomy, and 19% wedge resection) for NSCLC (38% IA, 23% IB, 4% IIA, 21% IIB, 12% IIIA, and 2% IIIB) were identified. The median age was 66 years, and 56% were males. Common histologies included adenocarcinoma (43%), squamous cell carcinoma (32%), large cell carcinoma (7%), and broncheoalveolar carcinoma (7%). A referral to medical oncology for consideration of adjuvant chemotherapy was observed in 41% (44/108) of all patients including 62% (41/66) of those with stage > IA. Lower referral rate was associated with older age, stage I, and wedge resection while higher referral rate was associated with younger age, more advanced stage, large cell carcinoma subtype, and pneumonectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was prescribed in 27% (29/108) of all patients, including 41% (27/66) of those with stage > IA, and in 66% (29/44) of the patients referred to medical oncology. Of those referred to medical oncology, older patients and those who underwent wedge resection were less likely to receive chemotherapy. Of all patients, higher chemotherapy utilization was associated with younger age and more advanced stages. Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy utilization in patients with resected NSCLC is low overall, especially among older patients and those with early-stage disease. However, a high proportion of the patients referred to medical oncology receive chemotherapy. Improved referral rates to medical oncology may increase the overall utilization rates of adjuvant chemotherapy in NSCLC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

6046 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy for SIII colon cancer is an accepted standard of care. Oral Capecitabine (C) has been shown to be at least equivalent and possibly superior to 5FU/LV (F) with a superior relapse free survival (RFS). This new option is associated with a higher drug cost. An economic analysis was undertaken to compare these two alternatives. Methods: A cost minimisation analysis was performed in Canadian $ ($) using C and F given as per the X-ACT (X) trial. The direct costs including chemotherapy drug acquisition, supportive medications, laboratory investigation and health resources utilisation were examined based in Nova Scotia. Indirect costs included travel and opportunity cost based on the average provincial wage and participation rates. Complete drug delivery was assumed. A direct payer perspective was used. A cost-effectiveness (CE) model was also constructed to estimate the required lower risk of cancer recurrence for C to be cost effective compared to F at a commonly used CE threshold. The Markov model developed used a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients with SIII colon cancer and projected costs and outcomes over 5 years (discounted 3% and in $2,005). All recurrences were modeled to death. Recurrence rates, median survival with recurrent disease, costs and utility scores were derived from the literature. Estimates of background mortality without recurrence were obtained from Canadian Life Tables. Sensitivity analysis (SA) was performed using a range of recurrence risk hazard ratios (HR) including that reported in the X trial. Results: Compared to F, C is associated with higher direct costs, principally reflecting the higher drug cost (difference: $5,589/patient) but less resources utilisation cost (difference: - $1,804/patient). The total indirect costs favour C (difference: - $2,464/patient). For C to be potentially CE compared to 5FU/LV, a ≥ 9% lower relative recurrence risk (HR = 0.91) with C would be required. At the reported RFS HR 0.86, the CE of C relative to F is $15,844 per disease free survival years gained and $22,097 per quality adjusted life years gained. Conclusions: C has more direct costs but has indirect cost savings. It has the potential to be cost effective as seen in the SA and is a CE alternative to F at the HR for RFS reported in the X trial. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

6076 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy in lung cancer has become the new standard of care. Assuming comparable survival and quality of life among acceptable chemotherapy options, an economic evalua...

The cytotoxic regimen of epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous infusional 5-fluorouracil (ECF) has demonstrated activity in a range of malignancies, including gastroesophageal, breast, and pancreatic cancers. Prolonged infusional central venous catheter (CVC) mediated therapy is not always feasible and modifications of the 5-fluorouracil (5FU) schedule have been reported. We reviewed our experience of both the standard and a modified ECF regimen in patients diagnosed with carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUPS). A retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with CUPS (31 adenocarcinoma and 5 poorly differentiated carcinoma) and treated with ECF between June 1994 and June 1998 was undertaken. Thirty-six patients, median age 56 (range: 24-74), were treated thrice-weekly with 50 mg/m2 epirubicin, 60 mg/m2 cisplatin, and 5-FU administered either by continuous infusion 200 mg/m2/d via a CVC (standard ECF) or as a 6-h infusion 600 mg/m2 through a peripheral venous catheter (modified ECF). Thirteen patients were treated with standard ECF and 23 received modified ECF. The median number of cycles administered was 4 (range: 1-10). Thirty-two patients had evaluable disease, seven (22%; 95% confidence interval: 8-36%) demonstrated a partial response, including three patients that received standard ECF and four treated with modified ECF. There were no complete responses. The median survival for all 36 patients was 9.0 mo. Median survival for patients treated with standard ECF was 11.7 mo as compared to 5.1 mo for the modified ECF schedule (p = 0.052). Liver involvement and elevation of serum CA19.9 were identified as possible adverse prognostic factors. Both regimens were well tolerated, with the only grade 3/4 toxicity recorded being leukopenia (four patients), nausea/vomiting (seven patients), and diarrhea (one patient). CVC complications in the standard ECF group were thrombosis (one patient) and infection (three patients). There were no treatment-related deaths. We conclude that ECF, whether modified or standard, has modest activity in the setting of CUPS. Patient survival is comparable to survival documented in previous reports of CUPS treatment. The apparent survival difference between the two ECF schedules may be the result of patient selection factors. The optimal treatment of CUPS remains unknown and can only be determined through randomized controlled trials.

6044 Background: Monoclonal antibodies (MAb), such as trastuzumab (TZ) and bevacizumab (BZ), have become an important yet expensive component of cancer treatment. The potential cost impact on health care budgets needs to be assessed in the context of its potential utilization. An estimate of the additional costs incurred by adopting TZ and BZ therapy in breast (BRC), lung (LUC) and colorectal (CRC) cancers was undertaken. Methods: The MAb costs per patient were estimated based on treatment indications, length of treatment, standard doses / schedules and local pharmacy data. Supportive medications, diagnostics and health resources utilization only required for the MAb therapy were also examined. This analysis was performed in Canadian dollars ($), and assumes complete drug delivery and uncomplicated cycles. Drug costs were based on average 2005 wholesale prices in Canada. The analysis took a direct payer perspective. We subsequently estimated the cost of MAb therapy per patient relative to the total costs of conventional cancer management without MAb therapy. Budget impact estimates on Canada’s health care system were then derived according to constructed schema, which accounts for absolute numbers of target patients and systemic therapy utilization. Results: The average costs of TZ per treated patient were $47,278 and $26,648 for adjuvant and metastatic BRC, respectively. For BZ, these were $47,250 and $38,500 for metastatic LUC and CRC, respectively. Other costs associated with MAb therapy were in the range of 3–6%. The predicted TZ drug costs in metastatic breast cancer were within 10% of the actual costs derived from pharmacy data. The potential life-time absolute costs to Canada’s health care system were approximately $118 million for TZ, and $262 million for BZ. This corresponds to an average of approximately 21% increase in the health care expenditure for BRC, LUC, and CRC. Conclusions: MAb therapy, such as TZ and BZ, may add a significant cost burden to Canada’s publicly funded health care system. The developed schema in this analysis may be of potential use to health care providers and policy makers in assessing the impact of MAb therapy on health care budgets. No significant financial relationships to disclose.